Simon Sobisch <[email protected]> writes:

> Bad side (the understandable reason Jim dislikes that): a user may code
> something that doesn't work - not sure if there are any GCC / glibc parts 
> which
> behave similar.

It's certainly possible to create builds of GCC with some features
missing (IIRC it's possible that libstdc++ may not be able to do some
things in absence of iconv, for instance, but don't quote me on that).

It's a fairly reasonable and frequent compromise to leave some features
as non-operational without extra libs present.
-- 
Arsen Arsenović

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to